pvxfandomcom-20200214-history
User talk:Grumpy/Archive 1
Hi de ho~ Ahah, but there is something here! Nice to meet you. [[user:Defiant Elements|'*Defiant Elements*']] ''+talk'' 04:27, 17 May 2007 (CEST) :hello to u too. lol there's still nothing in the user page. :P I just didn't like seeing the red colored username. --Grumpy 04:35, 17 May 2007 (CEST) Ya, there is no generic res, replace with res signets if/when you're formatting builds. Also, I was told that unfavored builds have a high chance of being wiped and might not be worth formatting. Eronth 18:58, 17 May 2007 (CEST) :Okay, thx for letting me know. I was just doing formatting by Category:Using outdated template, so wasn't really caring if it was unfavored or not. -- Grumpy 19:02, 17 May 2007 (CEST) :: lol, I used the random page button. Eronth 19:09, 17 May 2007 (CEST) Hey Grumpy, think you can help me format my user page, I am not a code monkey, but I like the way you have your layout Shireen 03:42, 19 May 2007 (CEST) :Heh, I would help if I could, but i'm no wiki-genius either. I had to look up a bunch of things to make my userboxes the way they are. I learned a lot by examples on wikipedia.org. maybe you should check some random pages out too. gl & hf designing your user page. ^^ If I know an answer to your question, I will be happy to answer. -- Grumpy 04:35, 19 May 2007 (CEST) /burst bubble I think Armond's trigger finger is itching to blast almost all of the Unfavored builds into oblivion. It's great that you're updating their formatting, but I'm afraid if they are going to be deleted, all your efforts will be in vain. Just thought I'd give you a heads-up, maybe you could read more here? - Krowman 05:19, 22 May 2007 (CEST) : Yup, I told him earlier but he said he's just hitting the bad templated ones. (^see^up^) [[user:Eronth| ‽-'('єronħ')']] ''no'' 05:23, 22 May 2007 (CEST) :: hehe.. lil script I have, it adds the "&action=edit&section=1" (prev didn't have section 1 part) to the bad format ones. Yet, i'm too lazy to make a full bot that auto formats all pages. So i skip even seeing the unfavored message. o.O Lot of them are stubs that doesn't get del anyways. -- Grumpy 05:30, 22 May 2007 (CEST) :: Wait a second, there are scripts that will do this stuff for you? And I am doing all these updates manually? Like a sucker??? Im very confused. Shireen 05:33, 22 May 2007 (CEST) :::I'm no coding monkey in wiki scripts, but I am a coding monkey in general. xD It's personally made for just self -- b4 you ask for a copy, I can't give cuz I doupt anyone can even run it. Process of making it into executable (windows binary) and working with your (whom ever is asking) browser is way too much work. -- Grumpy 05:36, 22 May 2007 (CEST) Convert sections Hey, I've done a check of sheet on my front user page and I know you've been helping with the converts. Feel free to make a mark to either claim a section or cross out a section when you get done, just to keep track. remember we also have to get the build stubs section done (which isn't that much compared to the unfavored sector). And all the warrior builds are done. Shireen 08:03, 23 May 2007 (CEST) :okedokie -- Grumpy 21:06, 23 May 2007 (CEST) Converter Macro Well, as i mentioned before, made myself a little script for easier editing. this time, trying to make a full macro which others can use as well. But since it's a macro this time, the script itself is rather "blind" and unaware of much contents that may be unique... but none the less, I'm trying it out and gonna test it a lil... Eronth apprently caught one of my bugged test run. already. :P I'll drop another note when i'm finished making it -- Grumpy 21:06, 23 May 2007 (CEST) :Your bot missed a variant in one of the builds, dunno if you need feedback or not. [[user:Eronth| ‽-'('єronħ')']] ''no'' 21:43, 23 May 2007 (CEST) ::Yea... Trying to figure that one right now, since it's bound to come up again. -- Grumpy 21:46, 23 May 2007 (CEST) :::I should probably find out if you'd rather have me leave the broken builds so you can figure out how to fix them or fix them myself then report. cause bot added to the resurrection signet. [[user:Eronth| ‽-'('єronħ')']] ''no'' 22:14, 23 May 2007 (CEST) ::::My script doesn't even have break line tag in there.. so I dunno how it got in there to begin with. My only suspicion is that it was there before and the converter just put it in there as well. But, I'm gonna take a break on the making of the bot for a while tho.... seems blind-editing style isn't working at all. I need something to be able to parse the whole page and edit each sections as needed in order to counter things like multiples in variants and such. Unless I can get a copy of source of pvxconverter (which I don't wish to recode myself -- although doesn't look like a great deal of work), I don't think whole-page parsing is possible. If I had it, it could finally deal with things like generic res sig as well as some odd looking ones to some degree. In any case, this macro method of converting is scrapped. Gonna have to either make via new stand alone prog (so it's not working blindly) or via php which can be built into the server. PHP method (or any server side script) would be fastest and most efficient, but I'm sure no one wants to give me full access to this server. :P -- Grumpy 22:54, 23 May 2007 (CEST) We could just ask for volunteers, each adopting a section or class, and they go at it. 5 or 6 people could have the entire site up to code in two evenings. Shireen 22:57, 23 May 2007 (CEST) :Yea, that's what I was thinking. But man power wasn't what was lacking, it was power of macros. They are afterall, just simulated keystrokes. As I mentioned, I knew there would be a problem due to that, but I tried it out anyways to see how it would turn out. Well, didn't work. Would work for program that's not blind (meaning it knows what it's doing and is aware of its contents). Comparatively however, programs take more time to code. Guess it boils down to how much dedicated I want to put in. -- Grumpy 23:05, 23 May 2007 (CEST) Quick Clarification Hey, could I get a quick clarification? You removed a delete tag on Build:D/Mo Dwayna's Reversal and your reason was: "poor build is not a criteria for deletion. use the talk page to communicate." Have you perchance read PvX:WELL? Perhaps I am misreading your short, sound-byte like reasoning, but PvX:WELL states that in fact, bad builds may be deleted simply on the grounds that they are in fact bad. Of course, they might not be summarily deleted, but, strictly in terms of the reason for deletion, a poor build does in fact constitute a criteria for deletion. Again, if I have misread your intent, please, by all means tell me, but, if you were simply unaware of that particular criteria, might you please reinstate the deletion tag? Thanks. [[user:Defiant Elements|'*Defiant Elements*']] ''+talk'' 05:36, 1 June 2007 (CEST) :I am aware of the WELL policy. However, I believe the WELL property applies when there are similar builds. ie, an inferior version or a duplicate version as it mentions in the page. The build that was posted was poor build by view but was clearly not a duplicate of another. For example, all the unfavored build - perhaps subjected to deletion due to uselessness and the real problem that it does take space, but is not due to the application of WELL property. Through any vetting procedure, that build will likely get sorted in junk, but I believe all new to-be-tested builds are subjected to a proper treatment before just deleting as it does not violate any immediate deletion criteria. Additionally, if the WELL policy indeed was meant to immediately delete poor builds, existance of previous (and future) vetting procedure would be questionable as poor builds has already been weeded out by magic means of classifying poor builds. :In short. I really don't see anywhere in WELL policy that grounds a bad build as a deletion critera unless subjected to another build in comparison. -- Grumpy (Talk | ) 05:23, 2 June 2007 (CEST)